Re: __builtin_types_compatible_p and 'char *' vs. 'char []'

[Matthew Woehlke <mw_triad at users dot sourceforge dot net>]

(No need to CC me, I'm watching via gmane.)

Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> > What about this (untested WAG):
> > typeof(*(&a)) __x = a;
> > - or -
> > typeof(&(a[0])) __x = a; // a must be pointer or array
>
> I've changed to using a static inline function that accepts two 'const
> char *' arguments and returns a 'char *' (casting internally to avoid
> the compiler warning), which took care of the issue.

Ah, yes, inline better than macro :-). I'd note that, from your example 
usage, it sounds like your return should also be const.

--
Matthew
Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
--
No .sig for you! NEXT! -- Unknown